Patient Comfort with Yellow (577 nm) vs. Green (532 nm) Laser Panretinal Photocoagulation for Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy.

Murtaza K Adam, Brett M Weinstock, Sundeep K Kasi, David S Ehmann, Jason Hsu, Sunir J Garg, Allen C Ho, Allen Chiang

Journal: Ophthalmology. Retina 2019;2(2):91-95

PMID: 31047351

Abstract

PURPOSE

Pain associated with panretinal photocoagulation (PRP) can adversely affect the number and quality of retinal burns delivered and subsequently increase the number of treatment sessions required to achieve regression of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR). We assessed comfort in patients undergoing treatment with yellow (577 nm) vs. green (532 nm) PRP for PDR.

DESIGN

Prospective, single-center, randomized crossover clinical trial.

SUBJECTS

Patients with PDR with high-risk characteristics.

METHODS

Subjects were equally randomized to first receive PRP with a laser indirect ophthalmoscope with either green (IQ 532; IRIDEX, Mountain View, CA) or yellow (IQ 577; IRIDEX) laser, followed by additional treatment with the opposite laser using standardized settings in the superior hemisphere of a single treatment eye per patient. Topical anesthetic was used in all study eyes before each treatment and power was titrated until moderate grey-white retinal burns were achieved.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was patient's perceived pain as measured with a standardized 10-point pain scale. Secondary outcome measures included laser power, treatment time, number of treatment shots with each laser, and physician ease-of-use score with each laser on a 10-point scale.

RESULTS

Forty patients (40 eyes) with a mean age of 54.0 years were enrolled. Mean pain scores were similar when comparing treatment with yellow and green laser (3.1 ± 2.3 vs. 2.8 ± 2.6; P = 0.40). No significant difference was seen in visual acuity (P = 0.44) or central macular thickness (P = 0.39) 1 month after PRP. Additionally, there were no significant differences when comparing minimum power required (243.2 ± 74.2 vs. 234.0 ± 59.6 mW; P = 0.55), treatment time (5.1 ± 3.6 vs. 5.6 ± 3.9 minutes; P = 0.384), and number of treatment shots (257.6 ± 12.6 vs. 258.0 ± 2.3; P = 0.68). Six of 7 co-investigators (85%) preferred using yellow laser over green and reported ease-of-use scores of 9.0 ± 1.2 and 7.6 ± 1.4, respectively (P = 0.07). No severe adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient comfort during PRP for PDR utilizing laser indirect ophthalmoscopy is similar for green and yellow wavelengths.

Copyright © 2017 American Academy of Ophthalmology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Address: Mid Atlantic Retina/Retina Service, Wills Eye Hospital at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: [email protected].; Mid Atlantic Retina/Retina Service, Wills Eye Hospital at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Link outs

Bant logo

© Copyright 2026, Nutrition Evidence

NED wishes to thank the following organisations for their support:

We use cookies to improve your experience and analyze site traffic with Google Analytics. By continuing to use our site, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more.